NARENDRA KUMAR v. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND THROUGH S S P HARIDWAR
ABA/644/2024 · 2025-01-03
Ravindra Maithani
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 9082 (UTT) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 9082 (UTT) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
SL. No Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGES’S ORDERS
ABA No. 644 of 2024 Hon’ble Ravindra Maithani, J. Mr. Gaurav Singh, Advocate for the applicant. Mr. Siddharth Bisht, A.G.A. for the State. Mr. Rajendra Kotiyal, Advocate for the informant through video conferencing. Applicant Narendra Kumar seeks anticipatory bail in FIR No. 419 of 2024, under Section 420, 506, 467, 468 and 471 IPC, Police Station Kotwali Jwalapur, District Haridwar.
Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that as per the counter affidavit of the State, there is no evidence against the applicant.
Learned counsel for the informant would submit that, in fact, one of the Investigating Officers in his affidavit filed in the anticipatory bail application of the co-accused has stated that there are ample evidence against the applicant Narendra Kumar also, but when the Investigating Officer was changed, now it is stated that the applicant Narendra Kumar is not wanted in the case. Learned State counsel, at the very outset, gives a statement that the applicant is not wanted in the case. The Court takes on record the statement given by the learned State counsel. In view of the statement given by learned State Counsel, nothing survives in this anticipatory bail application. It stands
disposed of accordingly.
(Ravindra Maithani, J.) 03.01.2025
Jitendra